Copying slides to digital

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by DuncanH, Sep 2, 2004.

  1. DuncanH

    DuncanH Guest

    Hi

    Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken years
    ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    this ??

    Thanks for your help, Duncan

    PS Also posted asking advice on a graphics package, don't know if that has
    any relevants
     
    DuncanH, Sep 2, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. DuncanH

    Jim Guest

    "DuncanH" <> wrote in message
    news:WCsZc.78949$...
    > Hi
    >
    > Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken

    years
    > ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    > this ??
    >

    The only way is to scan them.
    Jim
     
    Jim, Sep 2, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. DuncanH

    Bowser Guest

    Unless you want to spend a ton of time in front of a scanner, let Kodak
    create a Photo CD for you. Good resolution, and usually nice color. It's
    about $1 (USA) per slide, which is a little more than a scanner, but you
    don't spend any time at all.

    "DuncanH" <> wrote in message
    news:WCsZc.78949$...
    > Hi
    >
    > Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken
    > years
    > ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    > this ??
    >
    > Thanks for your help, Duncan
    >
    > PS Also posted asking advice on a graphics package, don't know if that has
    > any relevants
    >
    >
    >
     
    Bowser, Sep 2, 2004
    #3
  4. DuncanH

    Hunt Guest

    In article <WCsZc.78949$>, hdj@blueyonder.
    co.uk says...
    >
    >Hi
    >
    >Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken years
    >ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    >this ??
    >
    >Thanks for your help, Duncan
    >
    >PS Also posted asking advice on a graphics package, don't know if that has
    >any relevants
    >


    Duncan,

    You might want to look for some of the older Nikon scanners, like the LS-1000,
    that offers a bulk slide hopper. One consideration would be the available
    connections on your computer, as most were SCSI, as I recall. There should be
    a ton of these excellent scanners around for sale, as the newer guys are much
    higher in output, though much more expensive. Some sources, like Publishing
    Perfection (www.perfection.com, I think - they recently changed it) might have
    Nikon re-furm units.

    The recommended Kodak Photo-CD route is good, as well, and less time,
    equipment.

    Hunt
     
    Hunt, Sep 2, 2004
    #4
  5. DuncanH

    HRosita Guest

    >DuncanH wrote:

    >Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken years
    >ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    >this ??


    Hi,

    Get yourself a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual IV. You can get it at PCNation.com for
    $265, no tax or shipping. A friend of mine just got it and is very happy with
    it.
    Rosita
     
    HRosita, Sep 2, 2004
    #5
  6. On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 23:17:51 GMT, "Jim" <> wrote:

    >> Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken

    >years
    >> ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    >> this ??
    >>

    >The only way is to scan them.


    I'm thinking about going to a Canon 20D from my Elan II. I've got an
    old HP S20 scanner that I really don't like, and was wondering the
    other day how a macro lens over a light source would work for copying
    slides (and maybe even negatives) into the DSLR? Anyone try something
    like this?

    Lee


    --
    Lee Hiers, AA4GA
    Cornelia, GA
     
    Lee Hiers, AA4GA, Sep 2, 2004
    #6
  7. I take mine to Costco. either US$.29 or US$.39 each. If I am going to make a
    large print I send them to West Coast Imaging.
    http://www.westcoastimaging.com/wci/page/services/scan/scanning.htm This is
    a little pricey.
    "DuncanH" <> wrote in message
    news:WCsZc.78949$...
    > Hi
    >
    > Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken

    years
    > ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    > this ??
    >
    > Thanks for your help, Duncan
    >
    > PS Also posted asking advice on a graphics package, don't know if that has
    > any relevants
    >
    >
    >
     
    Digital Photo, Sep 2, 2004
    #7
  8. DuncanH

    Fred B. Guest

    I use an HP Photosmart scanner that does negatives, slides, filmstrips, and
    even up to 4x6 prints.

    I love scanning the slides and negatives in. I can do anything I want with
    them in my photo editing software.
    Takes times, but it's fun!

    "Hunt" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <WCsZc.78949$>,

    hdj@blueyonder.
    > co.uk says...
    > >
    > >Hi
    > >
    > >Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've taken

    years
    > >ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is the best way to do
    > >this ??
    > >
    > >Thanks for your help, Duncan
    > >
    > >PS Also posted asking advice on a graphics package, don't know if that

    has
    > >any relevants
    > >

    >
    > Duncan,
    >
    > You might want to look for some of the older Nikon scanners, like the

    LS-1000,
    > that offers a bulk slide hopper. One consideration would be the available
    > connections on your computer, as most were SCSI, as I recall. There should

    be
    > a ton of these excellent scanners around for sale, as the newer guys are

    much
    > higher in output, though much more expensive. Some sources, like

    Publishing
    > Perfection (www.perfection.com, I think - they recently changed it) might

    have
    > Nikon re-furm units.
    >
    > The recommended Kodak Photo-CD route is good, as well, and less time,
    > equipment.
    >
    > Hunt
    >
     
    Fred B., Sep 2, 2004
    #8
  9. DuncanH

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    Lee Hiers, AA4GA <> wrote:

    >
    >I'm thinking about going to a Canon 20D from my Elan II. I've got an
    >old HP S20 scanner that I really don't like, and was wondering the
    >other day how a macro lens over a light source would work for copying
    >slides (and maybe even negatives) into the DSLR? Anyone try something
    >like this?


    I've done it. I used a handheld slide viewer, a tripod, and a Canon EF 100mm
    f/2.8 macro lens. The results were passable, but somewhat muddy compared to
    my Epson 4870 flatbed. You can see a sample result of my tests here:

    10D + Macro lens:

    http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods10D.jpg

    4870 scan (downsized to 6 megapixels):

    http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods4870.jpg

    Warning - the 10D file is 2.4 megs, the 4870 file is 3.7 megs.

    I touched up the 10D colours in Photoshop.

    The slide is 35mm Velvia 50.

    Hope that's of some use.
     
    Chris Brown, Sep 2, 2004
    #9
  10. DuncanH

    Terry Hollis Guest

    Lee Hiers, AA4GA wrote:
    > On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 23:17:51 GMT, "Jim" <> wrote:
    >
    >>> Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've
    >>> taken years ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is
    >>> the best way to do this ??
    >>>

    >> The only way is to scan them.

    >
    > I'm thinking about going to a Canon 20D from my Elan II. I've got an
    > old HP S20 scanner that I really don't like, and was wondering the
    > other day how a macro lens over a light source would work for copying
    > slides (and maybe even negatives) into the DSLR? Anyone try something
    > like this?
    >
    > Lee


    The Nikon Coolpix 5000 has a slide Copying Adapter (ES-E28) which screws
    onto the lens and works ok. The Nikon lens has enough macro ability to do
    the job and it is much faster than scanning.

    --
    Regards - Terry Hollis, Auckland, New Zealand

    replace "nospam" with "terry.hollis" to reply
     
    Terry Hollis, Sep 2, 2004
    #10
  11. DuncanH

    Jim Guest

    "Terry Hollis" <> wrote in message
    news:BvDZc.20961$...
    > Lee Hiers, AA4GA wrote:
    > > On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 23:17:51 GMT, "Jim" <> wrote:
    > >
    > >>> Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've
    > >>> taken years ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is
    > >>> the best way to do this ??
    > >>>
    > >> The only way is to scan them.

    > >
    > > I'm thinking about going to a Canon 20D from my Elan II. I've got an
    > > old HP S20 scanner that I really don't like, and was wondering the
    > > other day how a macro lens over a light source would work for copying
    > > slides (and maybe even negatives) into the DSLR? Anyone try something
    > > like this?
    > >
    > > Lee

    >
    > The Nikon Coolpix 5000 has a slide Copying Adapter (ES-E28) which screws
    > onto the lens and works ok. The Nikon lens has enough macro ability to do
    > the job and it is much faster than scanning.

    Not enough pixels though.
    Jim
     
    Jim, Sep 2, 2004
    #11
  12. DuncanH

    Alfred Molon Guest

    Chris Brown <_uce_please.com> wrote:

    >http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods4870.jpg


    I don't want to throw mud on film, but this image looks noisy (or should
    I say grainy) and colours are oversaturated. In the top right corner
    there is a strange effect.
    Overall this scan doesn't make film look well - if that's what you get
    with film and a scanner, I'd say even a compact 6MP digital camera
    easily beats that.
    --

    Alfred Molon
    ------------------------------
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Olympus_405080/
    Olympus 5060 resource - http://www.molon.de/5060.html
    Olympus 8080 resource - http://www.molon.de/8080.html
     
    Alfred Molon, Sep 2, 2004
    #12
  13. DuncanH

    bob Guest

    "Jim" <> wrote in
    news:bgIZc.12847$:

    >>
    >> The Nikon Coolpix 5000 has a slide Copying Adapter (ES-E28) which
    >> screws onto the lens and works ok. The Nikon lens has enough macro
    >> ability to do the job and it is much faster than scanning.

    >
    > Not enough pixels though.
    > Jim
    >


    Pretty universal statement when you don't even know what the OP wants the
    scans for or of. If they're 1600 speed slides or if he's only only making
    4x6 prints then the CP5000 is plenty good.

    Bob

    --
    Delete the inverse SPAM to reply
     
    bob, Sep 3, 2004
    #13
  14. DuncanH

    Terry Hollis Guest

    Jim wrote:
    > "Terry Hollis" <> wrote in message
    > news:BvDZc.20961$...
    >> Lee Hiers, AA4GA wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 23:17:51 GMT, "Jim" <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> Help again please. I have loads (over a 1,000) 35mm slides I've
    >>>>> taken years ago, I want to convert them to digital photos. What is
    >>>>> the best way to do this ??
    >>>>>
    >>>> The only way is to scan them.
    >>>
    >>> I'm thinking about going to a Canon 20D from my Elan II. I've got
    >>> an old HP S20 scanner that I really don't like, and was wondering
    >>> the other day how a macro lens over a light source would work for
    >>> copying slides (and maybe even negatives) into the DSLR? Anyone
    >>> try something like this?
    >>>
    >>> Lee

    >>
    >> The Nikon Coolpix 5000 has a slide Copying Adapter (ES-E28) which
    >> screws onto the lens and works ok. The Nikon lens has enough macro
    >> ability to do the job and it is much faster than scanning.

    > Not enough pixels though.
    > Jim


    What a stupid statement! If he wants to do 20x16 prints that may be true,
    but he can print from the originals slides for that.

    He said that wants to digitise the slides, presumably so he can view them on
    a computer or TV, I can assure you that 5 mpixels is more that adequate for
    that purpose.

    --
    Regards - Terry Hollis, Auckland, New Zealand

    replace "nospam" with "terry.hollis" to reply
     
    Terry Hollis, Sep 3, 2004
    #14
  15. On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 10:29:56 GMT, Chris Brown
    <_uce_please.com> wrote:

    >I've done it. I used a handheld slide viewer, a tripod, and a Canon EF 100mm
    >f/2.8 macro lens. The results were passable, but somewhat muddy compared to
    >my Epson 4870 flatbed. You can see a sample result of my tests here:
    >
    >10D + Macro lens:
    >
    >http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods10D.jpg
    >
    >4870 scan (downsized to 6 megapixels):
    >
    >http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods4870.jpg
    >


    Thanks for the links Chris!

    Lee


    --
    Lee Hiers, AA4GA
    Cornelia, GA
     
    Lee Hiers, AA4GA, Sep 3, 2004
    #15
  16. On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 12:35:07 +1200, "Terry Hollis" <>
    wrote:

    >>> The Nikon Coolpix 5000 has a slide Copying Adapter (ES-E28) which
    >>> screws onto the lens and works ok. The Nikon lens has enough macro
    >>> ability to do the job and it is much faster than scanning.

    >> Not enough pixels though.
    >> Jim

    >
    >What a stupid statement! If he wants to do 20x16 prints that may be true,
    >but he can print from the originals slides for that.
    >
    >He said that wants to digitise the slides, presumably so he can view them on
    >a computer or TV, I can assure you that 5 mpixels is more that adequate for
    >that purpose.


    Well, as the OP of this little sub-thread...no I didn't say what my
    purpose was. Probably because I don't know. But since I was talking
    about replacing my film camera with an 8MP digi I assume that the
    number of pixels isn't the question.

    I think I was most interested in sharpness, contrast, noise, etc.
    compared to a film scanner...especially my old S20. Just general
    performance really. Truth be known, most of the stuff would probably
    be just to make some 4x6 prints or for web use...but you never know
    what you might run across on some old slide pages...

    I think the answer might just be to get the digi and give it a
    try...and if that isn't satisfactory, and I really need to digitize
    some old slides, just get a better scanner or have it done
    commercially. I was just wondering if anyone had tried it and how it
    worked out for them.

    Thanks for the input!

    Lee


    --
    Lee Hiers, AA4GA
    Cornelia, GA
     
    Lee Hiers, AA4GA, Sep 3, 2004
    #16
  17. DuncanH

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    Alfred Molon <> wrote:
    >Chris Brown <_uce_please.com> wrote:
    >
    >>http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods4870.jpg

    >
    >I don't want to throw mud on film, but this image looks noisy (or should
    >I say grainy)


    That's scanner noise. If you use Vuescan instead of Epson scan, and do
    multiple passes, it disappears.

    >and colours are oversaturated.


    It's *Velvia*...

    >In the top right corner there is a strange effect.


    If you're talking about the white ring stuff, that's clipping from the
    scanner. That was one of the first 4870 scans I did, and I hadn't yet got
    used to Epson Scan's habit of clipping the highlights.

    >Overall this scan doesn't make film look well - if that's what you get
    >with film and a scanner,


    FFS, what did you expect from a flatbed? It won't flatter 35mm, but I bought
    it for medium format, where it produces images which print at A3 and make
    similar sized prints from a 6 MP SLR or 35mm look somewhat inadequate.
     
    Chris Brown, Sep 3, 2004
    #17
  18. > On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 10:29:56 GMT, Chris Brown
    > <_uce_please.com> wrote:
    >
    >> I've done it. I used a handheld slide viewer, a tripod, and a Canon
    >> EF 100mm f/2.8 macro lens. The results were passable, but somewhat
    >> muddy compared to my Epson 4870 flatbed. You can see a sample result
    >> of my tests here:
    >>
    >> 10D + Macro lens:
    >>
    >> http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods10D.jpg
    >>
    >> 4870 scan (downsized to 6 megapixels):
    >>
    >> http://www.fastfoto.co.uk/Chris/VelviaWoods4870.jpg


    Very interesting, Chris.

    My take on it was that the 10D results were much better - the flatbed
    showed much more noise and some rather nasty thin black lines around the
    white highlights. The 10D's edge sharpness was poorer, though.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Sep 3, 2004
    #18
  19. DuncanH

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <F_VZc.513$>,
    David J Taylor <-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk> wrote:
    >
    >My take on it was that the 10D results were much better - the flatbed
    >showed much more noise and some rather nasty thin black lines around the
    >white highlights.


    The latter is a particular problem with the 4870 (or rather Espon Scan). Its
    autoexposure clips the histogramm, and it then produces those odd ring
    artifacts. After having the scanner for a while, I've got used to setting
    autoexposure, then using those settings as a basis for manual exposure and
    "declipping" the histogram before doing the scan. If one then does want
    specualr highlights, one is better off clipping it in Photoshop, which
    doesn't produce the offensive artifacting.

    Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to tell the Epson software not to do
    this.

    >The 10D's edge sharpness was poorer, though.


    Indeed. It makes a big difference on A4 prints, where the 10D ones look
    blurry compared to the Epson's. Scanner noise tends to all but disappear in
    prints, but the softness doesn't.
     
    Chris Brown, Sep 3, 2004
    #19
  20. Chris Brown wrote:
    []

    Thanks, Chris. Interesting to hear of the problems you encountered and
    the quality you found you needed.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Sep 3, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. RH Horn
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    12,010
    Tom Monego
    May 7, 2004
  2. Replies:
    12
    Views:
    567
    Stewy
    Apr 14, 2005
  3. Perk
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    388
    ASAAR
    Nov 3, 2005
  4. qwert2b2

    Prosumer vs DSLR for copying slides

    qwert2b2, Nov 6, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    464
    Nick Fotis
    Nov 6, 2005
  5. ~^ beancounter ~^

    Nikon bellows system - copying slides to digital image / d200

    ~^ beancounter ~^, Oct 31, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    491
    ~^ beancounter ~^
    Oct 31, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page